TheSiegeofKutAlAmara

In order to represent the Middle Easts rolein WorldWar I,Ichoseto

write about the siege of KutalAmarain that itrepresentsbothMiddle Eastern
affiliations inWorld War I aswellastheMiddle Easts roleinthe20thcentury.
As the siege neatly detailed the alliances on both sides of the battles in the
Middle East, it servesas arepresentationofpreciselywherethisregionstoodin
theconflict, concerning both its alliesanditsgeneralmindsettowardstheenemy
(specifically Britain as it was both a wartime enemy and a conqueror). In the
present day, this represented bellicose mentality has contributed to the current
volatilestateoftheMiddleEast.
The siege itself was a part of the MiddleEastern/German effort to
cleansethisregionoftheBritish,whohadpreviouslyoccupiedit,andistherefore
symbolicofthecontinuousMiddle Easternstruggleforindependence.Thisevent
further represents said conquerors military prowess and influence in foreign
nations inWW1in that thesuccessforBritishoppositionservedasquiteashock
both to Britain and to those who had fought Britain in the past. Untilthisera,
Britainhadbeen avirtuallyunstoppable militaryforce,andthesiegeprovedthis
notionofinvincibilitywrong,pavingthewayfornewworldpowers.

Traditionally, Middle Eastern government consists of a bureaucracy

1
which holds the majority of a states power.
There isa sethierarchyof ruling
elite and abaseof peasants, whosesupportismaintainedthroughpatronageand
favors to continually ensure lowerclass participation. Most of the agrarian
demographic are farmers,andtheagriculturalproductsofthemiddleeast include
citrus, dates,nuts,raisins,and cotton, which servedinancient timesto formthe
cornerstone of middle eastern trade and economy. This agriculture requires
irrigation asmostoftheMiddleEastisfairlyarid,andirrigationwastraditionally
most effectively achieved with apowerful, centralizedgovernmentwhich could
supply thefundsandmaterials necessary for its construction. Withthepresence
of naturalresources suchas copper,thetraditionalmiddleeastern trade network
evolved into a complex national and international system of crafts, trade, and
specializedmarkets, inwhich themerchantclassplayedalargerole.Thissystem
washenceimbalanced inthatitprovided powerto anupperclasshierarchy,but
it workedexceedinglywell in the 16thand17thcenturieswhentheOttomanand
Persian Empires ruled the region, as these large monarchies could support the
needs of the economic structure. The system of the powerful, and often
theologicallyassociated, monarchy has consistently and historically been the
regimeofchoice in the MiddleEast,andgovernments withthisstructurepersist
2
todayinmanymiddleeasterncountries.


The18thand19thcenturieswitnessedthecarvingup ofMiddleEastern
land by European powers (mainly England and France). This triggered much
resistanceamongst the native Arabs,andviolentrevolutionsagainst colonialism
continuedon until the conclusionofEuropeancolonization intheMiddleEastin
theearly20thcentury.
Thiscolonization was indirectlylinkedtothedeclineoftheOttomanand
Persian Empiresin the early19thcentury,duetoseveralconflictswithoneofits
largesttradepartners,Europe,andtheEuropeandevelopmentofsearouteswhich
could allow Europe to trade directly with the Far East, cutting out the Middle
Easternmiddlemen. Thismeant the end ofagriculturallybasedprosperity inthe
MiddleEast,asthebrokegovernmentcouldnolongerfundtheirrigationsystems
whichsosupportedtheeconomy.Thisprompted aneweraof revised economic
structure, in which Europes aid induced many higherclass or governmental
Middle Easterners to recruit mass labor andbuylands cheapfrom thesuffering
population, then sell them for massive amounts of money to European buyers.
Europes role in the Middle Eastern economygreatlyincreasedin the mid19th
century, where they sponsored infrastructure in return for governmental and
economic power. The oil age began in the early 20th century, when European
powers such as France and Britain had immense economic poweroftheMiddle
East and initiated the exploitation of thisareasoilreserves,spreadingEuropean
3
economicandgeographiccontrolthroughouttheregion.
TheOttomanEmpire becamebecameofficially involvedinWW1in the
November of 1914. The SultanCaliph of the Ottoman Empire, the traditional
ruler of what is considered the region of the Middle East and the largest
independent Muslim empire (including Turkey, presentday Israel, Syria, Iraq,
Qatar, and a small sliver of SaudiArabia, but barring a fair amount of the
Arabian Peninsula),declared ajihadagainstFrance,Russia,andGreatBritain(in
essencebecoming oneoftheCentralPowers of WW1).As Britishcolonistshad
recently defeated the empire in several conflicts, the Ottomans saw the
opportunity for empirical expansion if allied with the powerful industrial
economy of the German Empire. The Germans themselvessaw the potentialto
draw the Ottomans allies (Romania and Bulgaria) onto the sideoftheCentral
PowersthroughtheadditionoftheOttomanstotheirforces.
As Britainmadea preemptivestrikewithAngloIndianforcesatBasra,
Britains possession of the Suez Canal was attacked by the Central Powers in
1915, who took heavy losses and ultimatelyfailed intheir attempted possession
4
of the canal.
LaterBritishattacksagainst theOttoman empirestartingin 1915
were mostly naval and against Istanbul, and the British/French attacks at
Gallipoliagainstthe Turkish/Ottomanarmyendedinlargealliedlosses. Britains
2


continuedattempts for power inthe MiddleEastwere mostlyurgedalongbythe
Indian government, who feared thatiftheMuslim empireswere notkept under
control, jihads would arise in their neighbor countries such as Afghanistan.
Despite the factthatBritain regaineda footholdin the MiddleEastin 1916 and
1917, further German offenses and western front political traumas lessened
Britains expendableresources and the MarchRevolutionin Russia relieved the
Middle East of Russian attack. However, in l917 and 1918, Britain made
considerable headway into the Middle East and the OttomanEmpiresigned an
armistice with Britain in October of 1918. A large portion of land whichhad
once made up the Ottoman Empire fell into British hands and the empire was
5
essentially disbanded.
From here, land was doled out to specific cultures and
tensionsrose intheMiddleEast againsttheBritishandthosewhosomedeemed
hadbeengivenanunfairamountofland.
The proximate cause of the event was the cutting off of a group of
AngloIndianforces(consistingof 13,000men)belonging totheallied causeby
German and Turkish/Ottoman forces, the 13,000 beingultimatelyplaced inthe
Middle East by a British effort for wartime attacks into the Germanallied
Ottoman and TurkishEmpires. Thisretreatserved as agreatcontradictiontothe
initial success whichBritainhadin the Middle Eastin thebeginningofthefirst
World WarunderSir JohnNixon. LedbySirCharles Townshendin November
1915,theallied forces wereinitially pushedsouthby the Middle Easternforces,
after their defeat at the battle of Ctesiphon, into a town called KutalAmara
(located in presentday Iraq), where they were obligated to remain due to the
fadingstrengthofthetroops.
This event is important in thestudyofWW1, inthatitexemplifiedthe
complex and bellicose relationship between the Middle East and its colonizer.
This siege felled the grandiose and infallible image of Britainsinvincibility as
well as arepresentationofthefailingBritishtiestoitscolonies.Theveryfashion
in which Britain threw its military might around can be explained in this
situation, as it offers an indepth view of how Britains ancient strategy of
pouring into a conquered land with multitudes of soldiers failed due to the
inhospitableclimateoftheMiddleEastandthe poweroftheopposition,andhow
its armys composition was tied directly to a reliance upon coloniallysourced
6
soldiersandstaff.
The unseating of the myth of British superiority which arose from the
humiliating defeat at KutalAmara boosted the moral of all of the Central
Powers,theinformationreaching asfarasGermany,andperhapsspurringanew
hope on both fronts, western and eastern, for thosewho wereonce fearful ofa
7
terrifyingoppositionimpliedbyBritishinvolvement.
3


This symbolic milestonein Britishcolonialism helped pave the way for
the worlds next modern superpower the United States. Although the U.S.
adopted manyof Britains economic andpoliticalstrategies,failuressuchasthis
particular British defeat reinforced the idea of the impotence of traditional
colonization methods upon the global stage throughout this period, and the
increased success of geographically and socially nuanced countries suchasthe
U.S.
This event also represents how far the British colonial hand extended,
and servesasa symbolfortheloosedemographicgripwhich Britainhadoverits
foreign subjects in the Middle East. These MiddleEasternBritish tensions
represented by WW1 and this siege could be linked to how the British later
dividedtheirlandin the MiddleEast,andtheneventuallyhowtheBritishwould
cede Middle Eastern land to Jewish refugees in WWII, leading to the
establishment of Israel, Arab rebellion against the British, and ultimately the
currentIsraeliPalestinianconflictoftoday.
In the British Middle Eastern colonial era post WWI, the term
Palestine was first officially applied to the area of Palestine (in the sense in
which we recognize it today) as it was set under the BritishMandate and asit
included some of both presentday Israel and Jordan. It was from this British
occupation that the firstissuesconcerningreligious tensions inthe areabeganto
emerge. British occupation of Palestine and British dealings in the early 20th
century with the Jewish religion concerning the ceding of this area to zionists
planted the seed for this areas current unrest. This influx of colonists was
amplified by the Nazi regime of the 1930s40s, which forced many European
JewsintotheMiddleEast.
Throughout this largescale migration, extreme nationalism surfaced
amongst the Arabs, and belligerence ensued, weakening Britains graspon this
sectionofitsempire.
In 1947, the United Nations passed a vote in favor of two separate
theological states of Judaism and Islam, while also providing that the British
officially vacate the area in1948.Theplanneddivision leftmany onthewrong
sideoftheline,and thegeneral stateofaffairsinPalestineand theJewishstateof
Israel hasnotchangedmuchsincethisperiod.Israelhasplayedalarge roleinthe
history of the U.S., receiving much of its financial aid and military provisions
throughout this century andthe last. TheIsraeliPalestinianissueiscurrentlyone
of the largest in the U.S./international repertoire, and its existenceisultimately
8
duetoEuropeandominationoverMiddleEasternsubjects.


The perspective fromwhichIchoseto writemy poemwasthatofSisir
Sarbadhikari, an IndianparamedicwhoworkedintheBengalAmbulanceCorps,
a groupconstitutedof IndianpersonnelwithintheBritisharmy,whoessentially
provided medical aid to British soldiers. This perspective provided me with a
view of how a man belonging toa conquered demographicoperated withinthe
Britisharmyin WW1,and how the British militarythenlookedfromtheinside.
Accounts taken from the perspectives of Indian personnel state that they were
treatedasinferiorsby their British overseers andcoworkers, whichimpliesthat
eveninsituations inwhich Indiansandothercolonialpeopleswere working for
10
and with the British, their status was still that of secondclass citizen.
Sarbadhikaris viewcontradicts the classic imageofthecaucasianBritishsoldier
which is commonly utilized inanalyses of WW1, and permits the readerofmy
poem to be able to see the war and my event of the siege of KutalAmara
throughthe eyes ofa man subjugatedto the Britishinalandforeigntobothhim
and the other members of the military with whom he shares this unfortunate
9
experience.

AWordFromtheAuthor:
To representthis event,I chosea petrarchan sonnet for my poeticform.
Thisform utilizesa meterofiambicpentameter,contains14lines,andpossesses
two different rhyme schemes, which differ in the first and second stanzas
(abbaabba followed bycdcdcd). Rhetoricaldevicesinasonnetwhichcontribute
to its notability in poetry include the ability to insert in a sonnet flowery and
descriptive language,andthis permitted me toincludeahighlevelofdescriptive
languagein aportrayalofmyevent,whichfurtheredmyabilitytocreateasense
of myevents setting. Whenwritingthepoem,Ihad littletroubleadaptingtothe
meter, although I did include some syllabic changes within the meter to
emphasize certain segments, which my selected form allowed for. The most
challenging part of writing my poem was the inclusion of quite a bit of
descriptivematerialwithin14linesofwriting. However,Ieventuallywasableto
organize my intended content into an arrangement compatible with my form,
keepinginmindbothadherencetotechniqueandartistry.